alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 361.13 Procedures for salary offset: Methods of collection. ( a ) *General.* A debt will be collected by deductions at officially-established pay intervals from an employee's current pay account, unless the employee and the Board agree to alternative arrangements for repayment. The alternative arrangement must be in writing, signed by both the employee and the Board.
( b ) *Installment deductions.* Installment deductions will be made over a period not greater than the anticipated period of employment. The size and frequency of installment deductions will bear a reasonable relation to the size of the debt and the employee's ability to pay. However, the amount deducted for any period will not exceed 15 percent of the disposable pay from which the deduction is made, unless the employee has agreed in writing to the deduction of a greater amount. If possible, the installment payment will be sufficient in size and frequency to liquidate the debt in three years. Installment payments of less than $25 per pay period or $50 a month will be accepted only in the most unusual circumstances.
( c ) *Sources of deductions.* The Board will make deductions only from basic pay, special pay, incentive pay, retired pay, retainer pay, or in the case of an employee not entitled to basic pay, other authorized pay.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

DAY

 2,032

 2,928

 2,244

 1,728

 2,320

 2,555

 2,787

 2,647

 2,729

 1,961

 1,385

 2,274

 2,830

 3,098

 2,668

 1,574

 1,846

 2,827

 3,187

 1,418

 2,763

 2,791

 2,365

 2,950

 2,742

 2,270

 2,482

 3,176

 1,885

 2,099

 2,979

 53,815

 53,055

 53,184

 52,656

 51,665

 51,286

 51,149

 51,239

 51,192

 51,225

 50,526

 49,316

 49,010

 49,248

 49,729

 49,777

 48,784

 48,098

 48,379

 48,988

 47,885

 48,116

 48,361

 48,190

 48,583

 48,759

 48,477

 48,411

 49,008

 48,348

 47,925

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

JULY 2014 SHASTA LAKE FLOOD CONTROL REQUIREMENTS RUN DATE: August 20, 2014

 55,847

 55,983

 55,428

 54,384

 53,985

 53,841

 53,936

 53,886

 53,921

 53,186

 51,911

 51,590

 51,840

 52,346

 52,397

 51,351

 50,630

 50,925

 51,566

 50,406

 50,648

 50,907

 50,726

 51,140

 51,325

 51,029

 50,959

 51,587

 50,893

 50,447

 50,904

 6,491,000

 6,470,000

 6,449,000

 6,427,000

 6,406,000

 6,385,000

 6,363,000

 6,342,000

 6,321,000

 6,300,000

 6,278,000

 6,257,000

 6,236,000

 6,214,000

 6,193,000

 6,172,000

 6,150,000

 6,129,000

 6,108,000

 6,086,000

 6,065,000

 6,044,000

 6,022,000

 6,001,000

 5,980,000

 5,959,000

 5,937,000

 5,916,000

 5,895,000

 5,873,000

 5,852,000

 SHASTA 

INFLOW 

C. F. S. 

 PREV DAY

 F. C. PAR 

 (COL 3) 

 X .95 

 F. C. 

 PARAM 

 (COLS. 

 1 + 2 ) 

 .0356* 

 X DAYS 

 12/23 THRU

3/20 

 530,000

 MINUS 

 F. C. 

 PARAM

 (COL 3)

 COLS 

 4 X 5 

 F. C. 

 RESERV 

 (1,300,000 

 - COL 6 ) 

 MINUS 

 14,943 

 PER DAY

 AFTER 

 3/20 

 ADJUSTED 

 F. C. 

 RESERV 

 (7-8) 

 PERM 

 STORAGE 

 COMMENTS:

 * LEAP YEAR CONSTANT = .0352 

 CONSTANT .0356 = 1,300,000 / (TOTAL DAYS X (530,000 - 110,000 ) )

 IF COL 3 IS GREATER THAN 530,000 OR LESS THAN 110,000 USE THOSE VALUES FOR COL 3 INSTEAD OF THE COMPUTED VALUE. 

 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 

 56,647
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Carlos HERNANDEZ-HERNANDEZ, also known as Jose Armando Sanchez-Pineda, also known as Mario Soto Perez, also known as Eliazar *378Soto-Velasquez, also known as Elizar Soto-Velasquez, also known as Alejandro Hernandez-Torres, also known as Edgar Vasquez-Flores, also known as Alejandro Yasquez-Torres, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 05-20665

Conference Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

July 13, 2006.

James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for PlaintiffAppellee.

Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, Michael L. Herman, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Carlos Hernandez-Hernandez raises arguments that are foreclosed by *Almendarez-Torres v. United States,*523 U.S. 224, 235, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998), which held that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) is a penalty provision and not a separate criminal offense. The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
# U nit edSta tes C ou rt o f A pp eal s For t h e Firs t C ircu it
Nos. 08-1065, 08-1393 COLONIAL SURETY COMPANY, Plaintiff, Appellee,

v . AVI WEIZMAN, Defendant, Appellant.

__________ UNI-CON FLOORS, INC., KATHERINE L. HEBERT, SCOTT HEBERT, JOHN A. PACHECO, JAMIE K. PACHECO, KRISTINE WEIZMAN, Defendants.
ERRATA SHEET The opinion of this Court, issued on May 6, 2 0 09, should be amended as follows. On page 4, line 23, replace "$813,179.61" with "$813,129.61".
§ 218.11 When a spouse annuity begins. ( a ) A spouse annuity begins on the later of either the date chosen by the applicant or the earliest date permitted by law.
( b ) *Earliest date permitted by law* — ( 1 ) *General rules.* The earliest date permitted by law is the latest of— ( i ) The day after the day the claimant last worked for a railroad employer;
( ii ) The beginning date of the employee annuity;
( iii ) The first day of the month in which the claimant meets the marriage requirement as shown in part 216 of this chapter; or
( iv ) The first day of the month in which the employee annuitant meets the age requirement to qualify the claimant as shown in part 216 of this chapter.
( 2 ) *Full-age annuity.* The earliest date permitted by law is the latest of— ( i ) The month shown in paragraph (b)(1) of this section;
( ii ) The first day of the month in which the claimant meets the age requirement as shown in part 216 of this chapter; or
( iii ) The first day of the sixth month before the month in which the application is filed.
( 3 ) *“Child in care” annuity.* The earliest date permitted by law is the latest of— ( i ) The month shown in paragraph (b)(1) of this section;
( ii ) The first day of the month in which the claimant becomes eligible for a spouse annuity based on having a “child in care” as shown in part 216 of this chapter; or
( iii ) The first day of the sixth month before the month in which the application is filed.
( 4 ) *Reduced-age annuity.* The earliest date permitted by law is the latest of— ( i ) The month shown in paragraph (b)(1) of this section;
( ii ) The first day of the first full month in which the spouse is age 62 if the employee has less than 30 years of service;
( iii ) The first day of the month in which the spouse is age 60, if the employee has at least 30 years of service;
( iv ) The first day of the sixth month before the month in which the application is filed; or
( v ) The first day of the month in which the application is filed if beginning the annuity in an earlier month would increase the age reduction factor applied to the annuity.
# C_2012372EN.01000601.xml

| 1.12.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 372/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.12.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 372/6

---

Information communicated by Member States regarding closure of fisheries

2012/C 372/10

In accordance with Article 35(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 of 20 November 2009 establishing a Community control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy (1), a decision has been taken to close the fishery as set down in the following table:

1

| Date and time of closure | 5.11.2012 |
| --- | --- |
| Duration | 5.11.2012-31.12.2012 |
| Member State | Sweden |
| Stock or group of stocks | COD/04-N |
| Species | Cod (Gadus morhua) |
| Zone | Norwegian waters south of 62° N |
| Type(s) of fishing vessels | — |
| Reference number | FS67TQ44 |

Date and time of closure

5.11.2012

Duration

5.11.2012-31.12.2012

Member State

Sweden

Stock or group of stocks

COD/04-N

Species

Cod (Gadus morhua)

Gadus morhua

Zone

Norwegian waters south of 62° N

Type(s) of fishing vessels

—

Reference number

FS67TQ44

---

(1)  OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 1.

1

---
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4173 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 4173

 To provide that an alien who has traveled to Iraq or Syria during the 
    5-year period prior to the alien's application for admission is 
 ineligible to be admitted to the United States under the visa waiver 
                    program, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            December 3, 2015

  Mr. Brendan F. Boyle of Pennsylvania (for himself and Ms. McCollum) 
 introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 
                             the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To provide that an alien who has traveled to Iraq or Syria during the 
    5-year period prior to the alien's application for admission is 
 ineligible to be admitted to the United States under the visa waiver 
                    program, and for other purposes.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. TRAVEL TO IRAQ OR SYRIA PROHIBITED FOR PARTICIPATION IN THE 
              VISA WAIVER PROGRAM.

    Section 217(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 
1187(a)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
            ``(12) No travel to iraq or syria.--
                    ``(A) In general.--The alien has not traveled to 
                Iraq or Syria during the 5-year period preceding the 
                alien's application for admission under this section.
                    ``(B) Waiver authorized.--The Secretary of Homeland 
                Security, in consultation with the Secretary of State, 
                may waive the requirement under subparagraph (A) as the 
                Secretary determines appropriate.''.
                                 <all>
```
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

DAY ELEV

 1,061.69

 1,061.99

 1,062.22

 1,062.47

 1,062.74

 1,062.90

 1,063.01

 1,063.15

 1,063.29

 1,063.60

 1,063.86

 1,064.06

 1,064.26

 1,064.44

 1,064.60

 1,064.67

 1,064.67

 1,065.07

 1,065.19

 1,065.34

 1,065.44

 1,065.49

 1,065.40

 1,065.40

 1,065.48

 1,065.46

 1,065.48

 1,065.34

 1,064.95

 1,064.47

 1,064.05

 4,395.7

 4,404.4

 4,411.2

 4,418.5

 4,426.3

 4,431.0

 4,434.2

 4,438.3

 4,442.4

 4,451.5

 4,459.2

 4,465.0

 4,470.9

 4,476.2

 4,481.0

 4,483.0

 4,483.0

 4,494.8

 4,498.4

 4,502.8

 4,505.8

 4,507.2

 4,504.6

 4,504.6

 4,507.0

 4,506.4

 4,507.0

 4,502.8

 4,491.3

 4,477.1

 4,464.7

STORAGE

+4.9

+8.7

+6.7

+7.3

+7.9

+4.7

+3.2

+4.1

+4.1

+9.1

+7.6

+5.9

+5.9

+5.3

+4.7

+2.1

+0.0

+11.8

+3.6

+4.4

+3.0

+1.5

-2.7

+0.0

+2.4

-0.6

+0.6

-4.1

-11.5

-14.1

-12.4

CHANGE

 9,999

 11,564

 10,498

 10,281

 10,268

 9,314

 9,265

 9,368

 8,869

 11,550

 10,505

 9,316

 9,472

 10,311

 10,270

 9,276

 7,735

 13,178

 9,221

 9,102

 8,969

 8,913

 7,012

 8,272

 9,459

 9,634

 9,896

 8,834

 7,991

 7,711

 8,387

INFLOW

 7,121

 7,038

 6,854

 6,359

 5,775

 6,829

 7,386

 6,909

 6,625

 6,948

 6,633

 6,241

 6,396

 7,115

 7,737

 7,975

 7,500

 7,195

 7,256

 6,802

 7,250

 7,923

 8,224

 8,011

 8,187

 9,827

 9,554

 10,888

 13,644

 13,524

 13,836

POWER

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

SPILL

 0

 0

 0

 0

 250

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 1,067

 531

OUTLET

 386

 129

 258

 241

 267

 129

 259

 388

 173

 17

 26

 113

 104

 521

 156

 261

 235

 35

 174

 61

 227

 244

 131

 261

 78

 105

 44

 35

 165

 252

 260

C.F.S.

 .45

 .15

 .30

 .28

 .31

 .15

 .30

 .45

 .20

 .02

 .03

 .13

 .12

 .60

 .18

 .30

 .27

 .04

 .20

 .07

 .26

 .28

 .15

 .30

 .09

 .12

 .05

 .04

 .19

 .29

 .30

INCHES

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .29

 .40

 .73

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .63

 .03

 .23

 .00

 .02

 .00

 .00

 .02

 .73

 .21

 .51

 .00

 .00

 .00

PRECIP

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

MAY 2010 SHASTA LAKE DAILY OPERATIONS RUN DATE: July 27, 2010

IN LAKE

EVAPORATION

INCHES

C.F.S.

COMPUTED*

1000 ACRE-FEET

RELEASE - C.F.S.

RIVER

TOTALS +74.1 294,440 249,562 0 1,848 5,735 6.62 3.80

ACRE-FEET +74,100 584,022 495,006 0 3,666 11,375

COMMENTS:

* COMPUTED INFLOW IS THE SUM OF CHANGE IN STORAGE, RELEASES AND EVAPORATION.

SUMMARY

RELEASE (ACRE-FEET)

POWER 495,006

SPILL 0

OUTLET

TOTAL

 3,666

 498,672

PRECIPITATION

THIS MONTH =

TO DATE =

 3.80

JULY 1, 2009 69.25

 4,390.8
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 74 (Monday, April 18, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 21775]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-9351]



[[Page 21775]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-1961-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2011-0001]


Missouri; Amendment No. 1 to Notice of a Major Disaster 
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration 
for the State of Missouri (FEMA-1961-DR), dated March 23, 2011, and 
related determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: April 11, 2011.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Miller, Office of Response and 
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., 
Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-3886.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of a major disaster declaration 
for the State of Missouri is hereby amended to include the following 
area among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by 
the event declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration 
of March 23, 2011.

    Camden County for Public Assistance. Camden County for emergency 
protective measures (Category B), including snow assistance, under 
the Public Assistance program for any continuous 48-hour period 
during or proximate to the incident period.
The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) 
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community 
Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 
97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment 
Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, 
Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In 
Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially 
Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing Operations for 
Individuals and Households; 97.050 Presidentially Declared Disaster 
Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other Needs; 97.036, 
Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared 
Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.


W. Craig Fugate,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2011-9351 Filed 4-15-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P
#### William D. Neuberg, Doing Business under the Name of William D. Neuberg Company, Respondent, v. Avery F. Payne Co., Inc., Appellant. Avery F. Payne Co., Inc., Appellant, v. Mundex Trading Corporation, Respondent.

*826No opinion. Settle order on notice. Present — Martin, P. J., Townley, Untermyer, Dore and Cohn, JJ.
October 3, 2012 

Mr. Steve Page 

Director 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 

Re: VOC Petition for 2·Amino·2·methyl-1-propanol (AMP) 

Dear Mr. Page: 

The Dow Chemical Company 

1500 E. Lake Cook Road 

Buffalo Grove. IL 60089 

Un1tod States of America 

The Dow Chemical Company submits the enclosed petition to request that EPA exempt 

2-Amino-2-methyl-1-propanol (AMP) from regulation as a volatile organic compound 

(VOC) by excluding it from the definition of VOC found at 40 CFR 51.1 OO(s). 

AMP meets the criteria that have been used to grant prior VOC petitions. Specifically, 

the current maximum incremental reactivity (MIR) value for AMP is below the MIR 

value of the benchmark chemical ethane. The MIR value, in fact, is negative under many 

conditions, meaning that the presence of AMP inhibits ozone formation under those 

conditions. AMP also has very low volatility, such that less than 100 percent of emitted 

AMP is available to contribute to ozone formation. 

AMP is used to disperse pigments in water-based coatings and has significant 

performance advantages compared to available substitute materials. AMP is not a 

hazardous air pollutant (HAP) under Title III of the Clean Air Act and is not listed as a 

toxic chemical under section 313 of the Emergency Planning and Community Right-toKnow Act (EPCRA). 

Dow Chemical respectfully requests prompt action on this petition. Manufacturers and 

formulators of water-based coatings need access to AMP to meet VOC limits on their 

products without impairing the performance of their products. 

Thank you for your consideration of this petition. Questions may be directed to me via 

e-mail at: jfedders@dow.com or by phone at 215-592-3103. 

Sincerely, 

~~~ 

Jon Fedders 

North American Industrial Commercial Director 

cc: Dave Sanders
(No. 74-CC-509

#### Park Chrysler Plymouth, Inc., Claimant, *vs.*State of Illinois, Department of General Services, Respondent.

*Opinion filed April 11, 1974.*

Park Chrysler Plymouth, Inc., Claimant, pro se.

William J. Scott, Attorney General; Saul R. Wexler, Assistant Attorney General, for Respondent.

Per Curiam.
#### John Griffin, Appellant, v. Charles H. Armsted and Others, Respondents.

Interlocutory judgment affirmed, with costs, with leave to the plaintiff to plead over within twenty days upon payment of the costs of the demurrer and of this appeal. Held, assuming that the complaint is sufficient to show that the plaintiff is the owner of the notes and several chattel mortgages, or has such an interest therein as to permit him to bring the action (which is at least doubtful), it was improper to unite in one action the foreclosure of several chattel mortgages, given to secure different obligations, not covering the same chattels, some of which are claimed by one defendant and some by others. All concurred.
p. 1



# OAR Box 1384 Prepped by Charmelle Mathews



### Document

Number: 

# $/2*8 W-E-W2 Docket Number: 

# A-94-5 2

Printed 7/2/2008 8:42:10 AM

Sheet 212 of 264P. 2

07/30/tf « 1/tO O

From : Date : Contact : 

### A 9 4 5 2

Contac tRepor t Melani e Procto r an d Shaw n McKee , Pacifi c Environmenta

l Services , Inc . (PES ) Jul y 29,199 8 Mr . Stephe n Scharfenber

g Company : Di»e«Pacifi c Manufacturin

g Company

, Inc . Telephon e Number : (236)442-451 3 Fa x Number ! (256)442-4794

Contac tSummary ; Ms . Procto r state

d tha tDixie-Pacifi c Manufacnjrin g Company, In c wa s contacte d t o giv e manufacturin

g proces s fro

m & resi n wit h a hazardou

s ai r pollutan

t(HAP ) contento f

39.8 % t o 35% . Mr . Scharfenber

g confirme

d th e chang e i n resi n bein

g use d b y Dixie-Pacifi c Manufacturin g Company , Inc . li e state

d tha tn o cost s wer e associate d wimt e du e to any processin g problems , an d tha tan y increas e i n scra

p o r rewcoidn

g o f prrxluct s becaus e o f th e chang e wa s negligible . Dixie-Pacifi c Manufacturin g Company

, Inc . di d no texperienc e an

y difficultie s mprocessm g o r perfmm ^ di d no texperienc

e an y los s in busines s duet tthese factors . Mr . Scharfenber

g state d tha

tth e cos to f th e ne w resi n wa

s comparabl

e t o the ol d resin . H

e als o state

d tha tmer e wa s n o increas e I

n th e eas to f training , an

d n o produc

tcertificatio

n test s wer e necessar y du e t o the chang

e m resins . Dixie-Pacifi c Manufacbjrin g Company

, Inc . di d incu r a costc f a fe w hundre

d dollar s becaus e o f performin g drop-testin

g o n finished architectura

l columns . Accordin

g t o Mr . Scharfenberg , thi s cos t include s th e labo

r cos tt o mak

e an d tes tth e samples . According t

o Mr . Scharfenberg

, th e facility' s vendor

, McWhorte

r Technologies , Inc. . wa s ver y helpfu l mmetnmsitio n fro

m th e highe r HA P n^mte th e lowe

r HA P resm . McWhorte

r Technologies , Inc . performe

d th e testin g o f

propertie s an d an y othe r necessar y testin g free o f

charge , with th e exceptio n o f

the drop-testin

g performe

d b y Dixie-Pacifi c Manufacturin g Company , Inc . Mr . Scharfenber

g als o pointe

d ou ttha tMcWhorte

r Technologies , Inc . conducte d test s t o ensure tha

tth e ne w formulatio n provide s the sam e loa d bearin g produc tpropertie

s as th e ol d formulation . Mr . Scharfenber

g state d tha ti twa s possibl e tha

tcompetitio

n betwee n supplier s added a n additiona

l incentive fo r McWhorte

r Technologies , In c t

o aid Dixie-Pacific Manufacnirin g Company , Inc . m th e transition .

INFORMATION I S ACCURAT E •*y^»—^jir*» M
###### Editorial Note on Part 416

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 416 appear at 68 FR 53509, Sept. 11, 2003.

#### § 416.554 Waiver of adjustment or recovery—against equity and good conscience.

We will waive adjustment or recovery of an overpayment when an individual on whose behalf waiver is being considered is without fault (as defined in § 416.552) and adjustment or recovery would be *against equity and good conscience.* Adjustment or recovery is considered to be *against equity and good conscience* if an individual changed his or her position for the worse or relinquished a valuable right because of reliance upon a notice that payment would be made or because of the incorrect payment itself. In addition, adjustment or recovery is considered to be *against equity and good conscience* for an individual who is a member of an eligible couple that is legally separated and/or living apart for that part of an overpayment not received, but subject to recovery under § 416.570.

# Example 1:

Upon being notified that he was eligible for supplemental security income payments, an individual signed a lease on an apartment renting for $15 a month more than the room he had previously occupied. It was subsequently found that eligibility for the payment should not have been established. In such a case, recovery would be considered “against equity and good conscience.”

# Example 2:

An individual fails to take advantage of a private or organization charity, relying instead on the award of supplemental security income payments to support himself. It was subsequently found that the money was improperly paid. Recovery would be considered “against equity and good conscience.”

# Example 3:

Mr. and Mrs. Smith—members of an eligible couple—separate in July. Later in July, Mr. Smith receives earned income resulting in an overpayment to both. Mrs. Smith is found to be without fault in causing the overpayment. Recovery from Mrs. Smith of Mr. Smith's part of the couple's overpayment is waived as being *against equity and good conscience.* Whether recovery of Mr. Smith's portion of the couple's overpayment can be waived will be evaluated separately.

[60 FR 16375, Mar. 30, 1995]